Back to school allowance abolished for over 18s

Mary Anne Wilson

A very under the radar cut was made in last
weeks budget. back to school clothing allowance was abolished for over 18s who are in college. This is an attack on rural Ireland especially because many depended on that money for the first months rent, the grant is not paid until 4-6 weeks after college starts.

Idbatterim

what uniforms are they expected to wear in college? This gets better and better!

Ballfro

If you were aged between 18 and 22 and in full time education you were entitled to it if you met the criteria. It was in fact, a lifesaver for a lot of people I know.

Ballfro

If you were aged between 18 and 22 and in full time education you were entitled to it if you met the criteria. It was in fact, a lifesaver for a lot of people I know.

Gally05

ah come on back to school clothing for over 18's ,

flutered

Ballfro wrote: »

If you were aged between 18 and 22 and in full time education you were entitled to it if you met the criteria. It was in fact, a lifesaver for a lot of people I know.

i never knew that one existed, i put a few of them thro collage.

MagicMarker

Mary Anne Wilson wrote: »

A very under the radar cut was made in last
weeks budget. back to school clothing allowance was abolished for over 18s who are in college. This is an attack on rural Ireland especially because many depended on that money for the first months rent, the grant is not paid until 4-6 weeks after college starts.

A clothing allowance spent on rent? Shows more than anything that it should have been cut.

spank_inferno

I was never aware of that clothing allowance!
I just wore my normal clothes to college... I didnt purchase special "college" clothes

Christ, the amount of entitlements in Ireland is staggering.

Rightwing

And we wonder why we went bust ?

Ahern & FF have a lot to answer for.

Idbatterim

I just wore my normal clothes to college... I didnt purchase special "college" clothes

Christ, the amount of entitlements in Ireland is staggering.

I agree, its staggering! no doubt an allowance you weren't "entitled" to if your parents earned over a certain meager amount for breaking their b**ls?!

Put in place a loan system thats treats everyone fairly i.e. exactly the same and be done with it, sick of hearing from this group of whingers too! I was in college a few years ago in DIT, certainly no shortage of money to be spent on socializing at the time...

No Pants

Mary Anne Wilson wrote: »

back to school clothing allowance was abolished for over 18s who are in college. This is an attack on rural Ireland

Were people in towns and cities not receiving it also?

hfallada

I can't understand how in Ireland. A country that a large majority of people go to college. That people can't save money from when their children are young so that they can afford to send their child to college. The people that can't afford to send their children to college, are generally the people who smoke, go on foreign holidays and have a decent car.
There are too many benefits for people in this country.

Sam Kade

Idbatterim wrote: »

I agree, its staggering! no doubt an allowance you weren't "entitled" to if your parents earned over a certain meager amount for breaking their b**ls?!

Put in place a loan system thats treats everyone fairly i.e. exactly the same and be done with it, sick of hearing from this group of whingers too! I was in college a few years ago in DIT, certainly no shortage of money to be spent on socializing at the time...

Gay parents :eek:

road_high

hfallada wrote: »

I can't understand how in Ireland. A country that a large majority of people go to college. That people can't save money from when their children are young so that they can afford to send their child to college. The people that can't afford to send their children to college, are generally the people who smoke, go on foreign holidays and have a decent car.
There are too many benefits for people in this country.

There's a pervuasive the "state should provide" mentality ingrained and cultivated by FF over the past 20 years. Will be very hard to row back on this now.

July Rain

This allowance should be called the back to school expenses allowance, In reality most kids don't need a full new uniform every year but the allowance would go towards books, school bus ticket, school swimming lessons etc

tayto lover

Yet another farmers grant. I'd say they get 90% of the education grants.

augusta24

Idbatterim wrote: »

what uniforms are they expected to wear in college? This gets better and better!

Gally05 wrote: »

ah come on back to school clothing for over 18's ,

spank_inferno wrote: »

I was never aware of that clothing allowance!
I just wore my normal clothes to college... I didnt purchase special "college" clothes

Christ, the amount of entitlements in Ireland is staggering.

You can be 18 and still be in secondary school. Quite common actually... I was 18 in 6th year and so were most of my friends.

Idbatterim

If you were aged between 18 and 22 and in full time education you were entitled to it if you met the criteria. It was in fact, a lifesaver for a lot of people I know.

yeah I was 18 when in secondary school, how about 22?

No Pants

Idbatterim wrote: »

yeah I was 18 when in secondary school, how about 22?

Could be renamed the slow learner's grant.

augusta24

No Pants wrote: »

Could be renamed the slow learner's grant.

Hmmm there's a great sense of irony in that post... Would probably be lost on you though.

Couldn't it just be available for all children while at secondary school? Why should someone get it for a 17 year old but not an 18 year old even if both are in the same year in school?

augusta24

tayto lover wrote: »

Yet another farmers grant. I'd say they get 90% of the education grants.

What do you even mean? The allowance is only provided to people who are already on a social welfare payment as far as I know?... If not it's at least only available to those with low incomes.

lmimmfn

LMFAO, Seriously, WTF???????? are there any more stupid allowances that should be looked at? Back to Church over 65's clothing allowances? Childrens allowance for the kids over 30?

This country cracks me up, in terms of whats available and the sense of entitlement.

166man

I had to laugh when I read this thread title, can we get some perspective here please. Uniform allowance? That's literally what my own taxes and extortionate motor tax is paying for?

David Cameron's speech on the sense of entitlement could be used 10 times over here in Ireland.

It really maddens me reading about all these allowances that people can claim and then the cheek to come on here and complain about it.

It's simple, from the day your child is born, if you want them to be educated, you should put money away to save to pay for it and fund the education they deserve instead of a crappy 132 D Plate Toyota Corolla. :mad:

July Rain

lmimmfn wrote: »

LMFAO, Seriously, WTF???????? are there any more stupid allowances Childrens allowance for the kids over 30?

In Luxembourg they get childrens allowance until the child is 27
http://www.euraxess.lu/euraxess/Daily-life/Allowances/Child-allowance

foggy_lad

While I don't agree with some of the allowances given to people especially the communion allowance I know from friends just how hard it is for people on social welfare payments to pay the bills and feed clothe and educate their children. When bills and rent and food are paid there is very little left for drinking or smoking or having a good time! Many will be relying on the "legal" moneylenders for santa this christmas and some will have no option but to go to the "leg-breakers" for the extra needed to give their kids just a small bit of what others take for granted!

Give all those overpaid and overfed politicians a few kids and nothing but the dole for a year and see how they fare!

foggy_lad

foggy_lad wrote: »

While I don't agree with some of the allowances given to people especially the communion allowance I know from friends just how hard it is for people on social welfare payments to pay the bills and feed clothe and educate their children. When bills and rent and food are paid there is very little left for drinking or smoking or having a good time! Many will be relying on the "legal" moneylenders for santa this christmas and some will have no option but to go to the "leg-breakers" for the extra needed to give their kids just a small bit of what others take for granted!

Give all those overpaid and overfed politicians a few kids and nothing but the dole for a year and see how they fare!

Jesus wept.

Cleveland Hot Pocket

foggy_lad wrote: »

While I don't agree with some of the allowances given to people especially the communion allowance I know from friends just how hard it is for people on social welfare payments to pay the bills and feed clothe and educate their children. When bills and rent and food are paid there is very little left for drinking or smoking or having a good time! Many will be relying on the "legal" moneylenders for santa this christmas and some will have no option but to go to the "leg-breakers" for the extra needed to give their kids just a small bit of what others take for granted!

Give all those overpaid and overfed politicians a few kids and nothing but the dole for a year and see how they fare!

Should have thought about that before having children tbh, if you can't afford them don't have them. Can't expect the taxpayer to pay for your children and your smoking and drinking can we ? :rolleyes:

No Pants

augusta24 wrote: »

Hmmm there's a great sense of irony in that post... Would probably be lost on you though.

Help me out, I left school before I reached 22.

166man

foggy_lad wrote: »

While I don't agree with some of the allowances given to people especially the communion allowance I know from friends just how hard it is for people on social welfare payments to pay the bills and feed clothe and educate their children. When bills and rent and food are paid there is very little left for drinking or smoking or having a good time! Many will be relying on the "legal" moneylenders for santa this christmas and some will have no option but to go to the "leg-breakers" for the extra needed to give their kids just a small bit of what others take for granted!

Give all those overpaid and overfed politicians a few kids and nothing but the dole for a year and see how they fare!

Ah would you stop going on at the politicians. Many of them work savagely long hours doing what they do and their salary of €90k a year is what I'd consider a reasonably fair wage, their pensions are another story but the way people harp on here you'd think they're on 200k a year.

Many of us can work Monday to Friday and enjoy the weekend off work, I can't imagine Mr Noonan or the likes leave the offices on Friday at 6pm and return at 9am Monday morning.


What you need to attach is the bureaucrats in the public sector, those that work the 35 hours a week and get this benefit and that benefit, and also their extortionate pension when they retire at 55...

draiochtanois

This post has been deleted.

gaius c

Link to the relevant allowance btw
http://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/social_welfare/social_welfare_payments/social_welfare_payments_to_families_and_children/back_to_school_clothing_and_footwear_allowance.html

No Pants

draiochtanois wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Wasn't familiar with this one. Could a TD hand that back and refuse to represent anyone?

draiochtanois

This post has been deleted.

166man

draiochtanois wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Whatever about their benefits, I think they work long long hours to sort of warrant that wage.

Essentially IMO, it's the ridiculous levels of admin staff on stupid salaries that need to be eradicated because you can be damn well sure, whatever their basic salary is they're also getting benefits tucked away in there too. It's these that need to be targeted and to a certain extent the politicians expenses could fall by another bit, but to brandish them as doing feck all work for their money is wrong IMO.

draiochtanois

This post has been deleted.

Geuze

draiochtanois wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Note that due to the third paycut in the PS, wages for TDs have fallen again:

Now it's 87,258.

See here:

http://www.oireachtas.ie/parliament/tdssenators/salariesallowances/

draiochtanois

This post has been deleted.

Cleveland Hot Pocket

draiochtanois wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Still too much imo.

Red Crow

Cleveland Hot Pocket wrote: »

Still too much imo.

To what 20k? so we can have even worse fools in politics as if they aren't bad enough already!

87k is reasonable enough remuneration. If you have it too low you'll never attract anyone of a decent calibre.

Cleveland Hot Pocket

Red Crow wrote: »

To what 20k? so we can have even worse fools in politics as if they aren't bad enough already!

87k is reasonable enough remuneration. If you have it too low you'll never attract anyone of a decent calibre.

We already have some of the highest paid politicians in the EU.

87k is way too much for a part time job. 50k would still attract sufficient people.

And decent calibre? Seriously? After the mess we have been given and continued by successive headless chickens? Whoever is in government could not be worse than what has happened with the mismanagement of the country in the past 15 years.

draiochtanois

This post has been deleted.

July Rain

A thread about bact to school allowance and 80% of the posts are about TDs pay !

Cleveland Hot Pocket

July Rain wrote: »

A thread about bact to school allowance and 80% of the posts are about TDs pay !

A backseat moderator after less than a month of membership!

draiochtanois

This post has been deleted.

creedp

draiochtanois wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

I know and Jaysus he could do with a few bob to help him fund his retirement

Red Crow

Cleveland Hot Pocket wrote: »

We already have some of the highest paid politicians in the EU.

87k is way too much for a part time job. 50k would still attract sufficient people.

And decent calibre? Seriously? After the mess we have been given and continued by successive headless chickens? Whoever is in government could not be worse than what has happened with the mismanagement of the country in the past 15 years.

It could get far worse, stop being so naive.

draiochtanois wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

That's not even nearly comparable.

Cleveland Hot Pocket

Red Crow wrote: »

It could get far worse, stop being so naive.
.

I'm being naieve for expecting 50k to attract the same caliber of politician that we have now? Or for it to attract better? Or worse? Why am I naieve so?

:rolleyes:

In reality, Ireland Inc is bankrupt, so we cannot continue to pay the top rate for less than top rate staffing.

creedp

166man wrote: »

Whatever about their benefits, I think they work long long hours to sort of warrant that wage.

Essentially IMO, it's the ridiculous levels of admin staff on stupid salaries that need to be eradicated because you can be damn well sure, whatever their basic salary is they're also getting benefits tucked away in there too. It's these that need to be targeted and to a certain extent the politicians expenses could fall by another bit, but to brandish them as doing feck all work for their money is wrong IMO.

You know all of this to be a fact or you can feel it in your waters that it is true?

Red Crow

Cleveland Hot Pocket wrote: »

I'm being naieve for expecting 50k to attract the same caliber of politician that we have now? Or for it to attract better? Or worse? Why am I naieve so?

:rolleyes:

In reality, Ireland Inc is bankrupt, so we cannot continue to pay the top rate for less than top rate staffing.

You're being naive to think that the government couldn't get much worse. It certainly could. For a start we could have a Labour majority or even worse the ULA could get in *shudders*. Nevermind if the rate if pay was further reduced we'd get even more crap than we already do. We aren't blessed with politicians in this country. I think decreasing the rate of pay could turn more educated people away from running.

I think it's about right where it is.

Cleveland Hot Pocket

Red Crow wrote: »

You're being naive to think that the government couldn't get much worse. It certainly could. For a start we could have a Labour majority or even worse the ULA could get in *shudders*. Nevermind if the rate if pay was further reduced we'd get even more crap than we already do. We aren't blessed with politicians in this country. I think decreasing the rate of pay could turn more educated people away from running.

I think it's about right where it is.

Ok, couldn't get much worse was a little strong, but it still stands that we have not had the best level of governance. Could have been worse would also extend to an SF led government made up of populist statements, rhetoric and nonsensical/farcical "economic" policies.


But still, dropping the pay to a sample level of 50k pa would not stop people running for office. They should not be doing it for the money anyway, but 50k is well above the average industrial wage of the people who they supposedly represent anyway.

Scofflaw

July Rain wrote: »

A thread about bact to school allowance and 80% of the posts are about TDs pay !

Cleveland Hot Pocket wrote: »

A backseat moderator after less than a month of membership!

Cleveland, what July Rain says is not backseat modding, but what you say is. His is a comment on the kind of stances people are taking, which isn't a modding matter (with exceptions), while yours is a modding-style judgement on his behaviour with a gratuitous reference to him being a recent user.

You're a recent user yourself (I presume by the signup date), so no card on this occasion, but if there was one, you'd have it, not July Rain.

Red Crow wrote:

It could get far worse, stop being so naive.

While I'm here - please don't do this. Calling people "naive" is utterly meaningless unless you've discovered some kind of objective test for naivety, and it's an incredibly irritating way to dismiss someone's position without actually refuting it. It's a very pithy form of ad hominem - "don't listen to my opponent, people, he's naive and therefore has no credible opinions".

moderately,
Scofflaw